This is a comment on the state of education as it is practiced in some institutions. I'd like to note that not all kids learn the basis of mathematics by repeating 50-60 simple problems:-) Complex problem solving is possible at different ages and on different levels.
But let us suppose we don't go into these issues, and restrict ourselves to training as such, to skills. Adults learn skills, too, sometimes. At what age is training the fastest?
Well, I know some kids who got adopted after 10 and forgot their (former native) LANGUAGE. A lot of it, at least. Some pop songs they still remember, though, I am sure:-) Memory is a tricky thing. Not to mess with it, let's suppose we just look at "local" learning - whatever is learned and used here and now. Do you think ten year olds memorize songs faster than people at other ages? I watched a play "Fiddler on the roof" this weekend, and the actors afterwards said they rehearsed it only for two weeks. Wow - that's FAST!
It's helpful to establish some necessary skills or development levels. Suppose those are in place: we have people who know how to read. At what age, though, would their learning to program be the fastest? It is conventionally thought that young people learn faster, but I question this assumption.
As somebody who regularly does algebra with four year olds, I can only agree! Kids can learn advanced mathematics on concrete materials. However, the question of speed remains. At what age do people learn it faster?
Do you think it is the development that gets involved here, or/and experience? To take another example, it is hard to learn philosophy before you reach certain level of thought abstraction, AND experience certain life situations.
Suppose we pick tasks that are not beyond people's development levels, such as riding a skateboard, or programming a goto operation:-) What then happens to speed of learning vs. age?
Here is what I meant about luck and statistics. Suppose you have Practice A that leads to problems in 20 in 10,000 cases, and Practice B that leads to problems in 30 in 10,000 cases. What I meant was something like, "You need more luck if you use Practice B".
If we look at the subject, the probabilities of digestive problems in babies in industrial societies are quite small. The probability of problems is small for artificially fed babies. The probability of problems is small for breastfed babies. One of these probabilities is smallER.
The questions of dangers vs. benefits is quite interesting in this context. Let us take the numbers about Practices A and B above and make two statements: (1) Practice A has the benefit of causing 10 less problems per 10,000, compared to B. (2) Practice B is more dangerous by 10 cases per 10,000, compared to A.
The numbers are the same, but the statements seem to mean different things. Namely, (1) refers to B as "the norm" and A as "an innovation, with some extra benefits". On the other hand, (2) refers to A as "the norm" with B as "a dangerous innovation".
So, the choice between "the benefits of breastfeeding" and "the dangers of formula" usually indicates the choice of the practice one considers "the norm".
You may want to read Media Releases on the subject from La Leche League International. The organization claims that the dangers of artificial feeding and the benefits of breastfeeding still outweight the danger of pollutants in mother's milk. On the page, there is also a list of (rather obvious) ten steps you can take to reduce the level of dangerous chemicals in your body, such as stopping smoking, or avoiding eating contaminated fish.
Speaking of being lucky or unlucky - that's where statistics comes in. One's chances of being lucky in Situation A can be statistically compared to one's chances of being lucky in Situation B. You can still get lucky (or not) in both situations, and then take necessary steps, such as supplements or formula adjustments or ped change, in this particular case. However, the initial chances should be weighed too. Well, the initial chances of getting lucky with breastfeeding are higher, statistically, than the initial chances of getting lucky with artificial feeding. I am talking about digestive problems, specifically. These are still chances, not guarantees:-)
Problems with nursing are entirely possible, as well as with any other bodily function. There are a lot of people who use artificial kidneys because their own do not work. These people would die if they tried to use their own kidneys.
Usually, the same organizations that support breastfeeding, such as La Leche League, can also advise parents in case there are problems. Statistically, that is, for large numbers of people, breastfeeding is safer than artificial feeding.
According to La Leche League International, which conducts and disseminates research on the subject, breastfeeding still remains the best choice even in a poisoned worlds. See their Media Release on the topic. Their conclusion, based on reviews of studies on the subject, is that at this point benefits of breastfeeding and dangers of artificial feeding outweight the risks from pollutants.
It is understandable that babies' health can be used as a strong argument in politics. However, one should be careful not to harm the babies in the process. If families switch to artificial feeding as a result of such an environmental compain, babies will be hurt, and some will even die as a result (it's documented that artificial feeding leads to such dire consequences in a small percent of babies). So I suggest a balancing act between discussing danger to children, and yet not encouraging artificial feeding.
How about a three-day version of gardening?:-) Put some seeds in a dish... Pour a little water... Add water every day, just enough to cover the seeds... Rinse and eat when sprouts look good enough. You can buy good grain in healthy food stores like Whole Foods.
If you realize you are in pain, FIND A BREASTFEEDING CONSULTANT. Some pain in the first week is expected, but... If the pain is strong, or if it lasts - the baby may be holding the nipple in the wrong way. So many things about breastfeeding can be fixed if they go wrong, but you have to know what you are doing. Unfortunately, not many girls and young women get to see trully experienced women breastfeeding, since it is considered private. Hence, girls do not learn how to do it. Breastfeeding is a social act and a learned skill, it is not completely instincive... So, if something does not work - try a La Leche League specialist.
On the brighter side, in just a month or two on the first baby, shorter on next kids, most problems with breasts such as cracked nipples and leaks are gone! Then breastfeeding can go on for a long time. It is great for coping with "terrible twos" and such! There are many, many nights and car trips and other occasions when a cry of a cranky baby (one of the most horrible sounds you will ever hear!) turns into the quiet of nursing...
Well, some fun things and activities for the baby... Thing number one is called a sling, or "over the shoulder carrier". With a baby in the sling, you can type your dissertation (as I did), walk around and participate in some of your regular activities, such as cleaning, reading:-) or giving talk at seminars (as I also did) - all without bothering the baby. It is much easier to travel, to calm the baby during troubled night times, etc. if the baby is nursing... Log onto La Leche League for info on how to prepare for that and how to support your wife's nursing.
A computer is a great baby toy. Put some pretty pictures into PowerPoint - the baby will bang on keyboard and each bang will produce a new slide. It helps a lot with those colics at three or four month of age and later too. When the baby is about nine or ten month, you can get a touchscreen - the one that is clapped onto your regular computer screen. It costs around one hundred dollars... But then the baby can play computer games meaningfully, while with the mouse it will take about another year until the coordination catches up... Reader Rabbit Baby and Reader Rabbit Toddler are good beginner games.
Technology allows more people who do not have any idea about the subject... To get access to teaching this subject. It may become easier, for example, for a substitute who has no idea about calculus to "teach" it using some problem-generating and problem-checking software such as.
It may be a bit far out, but here goes:-) There are basic metaphors underlying much of human thinking. For example, ideas like "up is good, down is bad" or "time is a commodity that can be spent or saved"... Major scientific discoveries are hypothesized to influence such basic metaphors and thus all thinking. A relatively new example is relativity theory. An older example is the switch to the heliocentric model. I think chaos theory is a strong source of new metaphors entering all areas of human thought. Here is an author who extensively uses fractals and chaos theory metaphors in education research.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a comment on the state of education as it is practiced in some institutions. I'd like to note that not all kids learn the basis of mathematics by repeating 50-60 simple problems :-) Complex problem solving is possible at different ages and on different levels.
But let us suppose we don't go into these issues, and restrict ourselves to training as such, to skills. Adults learn skills, too, sometimes. At what age is training the fastest?
Well, I know some kids who got adopted after 10 and forgot their (former native) LANGUAGE. A lot of it, at least. Some pop songs they still remember, though, I am sure :-) Memory is a tricky thing. Not to mess with it, let's suppose we just look at "local" learning - whatever is learned and used here and now. Do you think ten year olds memorize songs faster than people at other ages? I watched a play "Fiddler on the roof" this weekend, and the actors afterwards said they rehearsed it only for two weeks. Wow - that's FAST!
How would you compare the speed of your learning at different ages? Do you learn faster now, or did you learn faster at some other age?
Wouldn such qualitative differences make older people learn faster, then?
It's helpful to establish some necessary skills or development levels. Suppose those are in place: we have people who know how to read. At what age, though, would their learning to program be the fastest? It is conventionally thought that young people learn faster, but I question this assumption.
At what age, do you think, people would learn the spelling the fastest? :-))
At what age, comparing the ages you have already experienced :-), you'd say you could learn such military stuff in the fastest way?
As somebody who regularly does algebra with four year olds, I can only agree! Kids can learn advanced mathematics on concrete materials. However, the question of speed remains. At what age do people learn it faster?
Do you think it is the development that gets involved here, or/and experience? To take another example, it is hard to learn philosophy before you reach certain level of thought abstraction, AND experience certain life situations.
:-) What then happens to speed of learning vs. age?
Suppose we pick tasks that are not beyond people's development levels, such as riding a skateboard, or programming a goto operation
So, if you must find the fastest person to learn how to program your computer to say "Hello, world"... You will pick a two year old?
What is your definition of "lucky"? :-)
Here is what I meant about luck and statistics. Suppose you have Practice A that leads to problems in 20 in 10,000 cases, and Practice B that leads to problems in 30 in 10,000 cases. What I meant was something like, "You need more luck if you use Practice B".
If we look at the subject, the probabilities of digestive problems in babies in industrial societies are quite small. The probability of problems is small for artificially fed babies. The probability of problems is small for breastfed babies. One of these probabilities is smallER.
The questions of dangers vs. benefits is quite interesting in this context. Let us take the numbers about Practices A and B above and make two statements:
(1) Practice A has the benefit of causing 10 less problems per 10,000, compared to B.
(2) Practice B is more dangerous by 10 cases per 10,000, compared to A.
The numbers are the same, but the statements seem to mean different things. Namely, (1) refers to B as "the norm" and A as "an innovation, with some extra benefits". On the other hand, (2) refers to A as "the norm" with B as "a dangerous innovation".
So, the choice between "the benefits of breastfeeding" and "the dangers of formula" usually indicates the choice of the practice one considers "the norm".
You may want to read Media Releases on the subject from La Leche League International. The organization claims that the dangers of artificial feeding and the benefits of breastfeeding still outweight the danger of pollutants in mother's milk. On the page, there is also a list of (rather obvious) ten steps you can take to reduce the level of dangerous chemicals in your body, such as stopping smoking, or avoiding eating contaminated fish.
Speaking of being lucky or unlucky - that's where statistics comes in. One's chances of being lucky in Situation A can be statistically compared to one's chances of being lucky in Situation B. You can still get lucky (or not) in both situations, and then take necessary steps, such as supplements or formula adjustments or ped change, in this particular case. However, the initial chances should be weighed too. Well, the initial chances of getting lucky with breastfeeding are higher, statistically, than the initial chances of getting lucky with artificial feeding. I am talking about digestive problems, specifically. These are still chances, not guarantees :-)
Problems with nursing are entirely possible, as well as with any other bodily function. There are a lot of people who use artificial kidneys because their own do not work. These people would die if they tried to use their own kidneys.
Usually, the same organizations that support breastfeeding, such as La Leche League, can also advise parents in case there are problems. Statistically, that is, for large numbers of people, breastfeeding is safer than artificial feeding.
According to La Leche League International, which conducts and disseminates research on the subject, breastfeeding still remains the best choice even in a poisoned worlds. See their Media Release on the topic. Their conclusion, based on reviews of studies on the subject, is that at this point benefits of breastfeeding and dangers of artificial feeding outweight the risks from pollutants.
It is understandable that babies' health can be used as a strong argument in politics. However, one should be careful not to harm the babies in the process. If families switch to artificial feeding as a result of such an environmental compain, babies will be hurt, and some will even die as a result (it's documented that artificial feeding leads to such dire consequences in a small percent of babies). So I suggest a balancing act between discussing danger to children, and yet not encouraging artificial feeding.
I did too :-) Worked for a year on this Interactivate project, before going to the graduate school...
This is a virtual pet site with MANY games and other interesting things to do. It is absolutely free and the ads are small.
How about a three-day version of gardening? :-) Put some seeds in a dish... Pour a little water... Add water every day, just enough to cover the seeds... Rinse and eat when sprouts look good enough. You can buy good grain in healthy food stores like Whole Foods.
If you realize you are in pain, FIND A BREASTFEEDING CONSULTANT. Some pain in the first week is expected, but... If the pain is strong, or if it lasts - the baby may be holding the nipple in the wrong way. So many things about breastfeeding can be fixed if they go wrong, but you have to know what you are doing. Unfortunately, not many girls and young women get to see trully experienced women breastfeeding, since it is considered private. Hence, girls do not learn how to do it. Breastfeeding is a social act and a learned skill, it is not completely instincive... So, if something does not work - try a La Leche League specialist.
On the brighter side, in just a month or two on the first baby, shorter on next kids, most problems with breasts such as cracked nipples and leaks are gone! Then breastfeeding can go on for a long time. It is great for coping with "terrible twos" and such! There are many, many nights and car trips and other occasions when a cry of a cranky baby (one of the most horrible sounds you will ever hear!) turns into the quiet of nursing...
Well, some fun things and activities for the baby... Thing number one is called a sling, or "over the shoulder carrier". With a baby in the sling, you can type your dissertation (as I did), walk around and participate in some of your regular activities, such as cleaning, reading :-) or giving talk at seminars (as I also did) - all without bothering the baby. It is much easier to travel, to calm the baby during troubled night times, etc. if the baby is nursing... Log onto La Leche League for info on how to prepare for that and how to support your wife's nursing.
A computer is a great baby toy. Put some pretty pictures into PowerPoint - the baby will bang on keyboard and each bang will produce a new slide. It helps a lot with those colics at three or four month of age and later too. When the baby is about nine or ten month, you can get a touchscreen - the one that is clapped onto your regular computer screen. It costs around one hundred dollars... But then the baby can play computer games meaningfully, while with the mouse it will take about another year until the coordination catches up... Reader Rabbit Baby and Reader Rabbit Toddler are good beginner games.
Technology allows more people who do not have any idea about the subject... To get access to teaching this subject. It may become easier, for example, for a substitute who has no idea about calculus to "teach" it using some problem-generating and problem-checking software such as .
Ignore what school tells you to do. Start learning differential equations-based physics, not the dumb algebra stuff they give you...
Thanks, I could use some adrenaline to wake up. Who needs coffee with helpful folks like that? :-)))
It may be a bit far out, but here goes :-) There are basic metaphors underlying much of human thinking. For example, ideas like "up is good, down is bad" or "time is a commodity that can be spent or saved"... Major scientific discoveries are hypothesized to influence such basic metaphors and thus all thinking. A relatively new example is relativity theory. An older example is the switch to the heliocentric model. I think chaos theory is a strong source of new metaphors entering all areas of human thought. Here is an author who extensively uses fractals and chaos theory metaphors in education research.